saliotthomas
New Member
It might become an habit but i started the years with Yates again and again was caught by is intimate knowlegde of humain shortcomings.
What really strikes me is the strong tigh betwin the two books, it feel like to different stories in a major one. A bit like La comedie humaine of Balzac, different books but so close together that they are part of a bigger picture of all different aspects of humain soul.
Sarah and Emilie could very well be cousins of the Wheelers or neighbourgs at some stage in their mother perigrinatons.
Yates is a horrible perverse man, he draw us in the lives of those two girls and spend is time playing with their pardoxes, their weakness, ever changing, nothing holds and at the same time there is logic and inheritance in the catastrophy.
Emile is the intelectual but she never manage to write a proper piece as Sarah the more homely who often missuse words write quite well.
Sarah the full beauty is victime of this fullness with age as Emile the more plain and flat is less afflicted and blooms laters.
Emilie wants to help but no one really can help anyone in a relationship, one offer, often pretend sincerity, but it's more an act of loyalty, a show.
That were Yates is the most accute, he describe strong links but also the impossiblity of any real communication, even with the ones you love the most.
Emilie loves Sarah but there was a vague feeling of jalousie in there childhood ,Sarah was the beauty, the loved and so an insinuating revenge creep in there relation, even if she never aknowledge it.
It stop her from going all the way to really get involved.
There was a beautifull part at the end of Revolutionary road when the friend (can't remember the name) is crying, then realize that after a time he indulge in sobs and by so soil his true feelings.
This is Yates all the way,a mix of sincerity and playacting so intricate in humain feeling that it spoils most of our dealing with other as well as a true perception of ourselves.
Richard Yates in a magnificent pervert who by telling simple casual stories bring the worst of us out in the open.
Damn you
What really strikes me is the strong tigh betwin the two books, it feel like to different stories in a major one. A bit like La comedie humaine of Balzac, different books but so close together that they are part of a bigger picture of all different aspects of humain soul.
Sarah and Emilie could very well be cousins of the Wheelers or neighbourgs at some stage in their mother perigrinatons.
Yates is a horrible perverse man, he draw us in the lives of those two girls and spend is time playing with their pardoxes, their weakness, ever changing, nothing holds and at the same time there is logic and inheritance in the catastrophy.
Emile is the intelectual but she never manage to write a proper piece as Sarah the more homely who often missuse words write quite well.
Sarah the full beauty is victime of this fullness with age as Emile the more plain and flat is less afflicted and blooms laters.
Emilie wants to help but no one really can help anyone in a relationship, one offer, often pretend sincerity, but it's more an act of loyalty, a show.
That were Yates is the most accute, he describe strong links but also the impossiblity of any real communication, even with the ones you love the most.
Emilie loves Sarah but there was a vague feeling of jalousie in there childhood ,Sarah was the beauty, the loved and so an insinuating revenge creep in there relation, even if she never aknowledge it.
It stop her from going all the way to really get involved.
There was a beautifull part at the end of Revolutionary road when the friend (can't remember the name) is crying, then realize that after a time he indulge in sobs and by so soil his true feelings.
This is Yates all the way,a mix of sincerity and playacting so intricate in humain feeling that it spoils most of our dealing with other as well as a true perception of ourselves.
Richard Yates in a magnificent pervert who by telling simple casual stories bring the worst of us out in the open.
Damn you
